[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <be96aa3f-f7df-8fa9-02d6-fe26cc01d555@infradead.org>
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2023 16:16:15 -0700
From: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
To: Andrew Randrianasulu <randrianasulu@...il.com>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Build failure in 6.5-rcX ?
Hi,
On 8/11/23 13:39, Andrew Randrianasulu wrote:
> I was trying to crosscompile linux git
>
> 9106536c1aa37bcf60202ad93bb8b94bcd29f3f0
>
> Unfortunately I got this error:
>
> ====
> bash-5.1$ make ARCH=x86_64 CROSS_COMPILE=x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu-
> CALL scripts/checksyscalls.sh
> DESCEND objtool
> INSTALL libsubcmd_headers
> CHK kernel/kheaders_data.tar.xz
> UPD include/generated/utsversion.h
> CC init/version-timestamp.o
> LD .tmp_vmlinux.kallsyms1
> arch/x86/kernel/irq.o: In function `__common_interrupt':
> irq.c:(.text+0x1727): undefined reference to `irq_regs'
> irq.c:(.text+0x172f): undefined reference to `irq_regs'
> irq.c:(.text+0x179a): undefined reference to `irq_regs'
> arch/x86/kernel/irq.o: In function `__sysvec_x86_platform_ipi':
> irq.c:(.text+0x1897): undefined reference to `irq_regs'
> irq.c:(.text+0x189f): undefined reference to `irq_regs'
> arch/x86/kernel/irq.o:irq.c:(.text+0x194a): more undefined references
> to `irq_regs' follow
> make[2]: *** [scripts/Makefile.vmlinux:36: vmlinux] Ошибка 1
> make[1]: *** [/dev/shm/linux-2.6/Makefile:1250: vmlinux] Ошибка 2
> make: *** [Makefile:234: __sub-make] Ошибка 2
>
This probably isn't going to help much, but I can't reproduce this build error.
I tried native x86_64 build, LLVM build, and command-wise, an x86_64 cross build,
all with no problems.
> ====
>
> config attached.
>
> I use binutils 2.25.1 and gcc 7.5.0 targeting x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu-
>
> so my compile line was
>
> make ARCH=x86_64 CROSS_COMPILE=x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu- -j8
>
> after adding crosscompiler into PATH
>
> I tried to rebuild with make clean, but issue still here.
>
> I am not subscribed to LKML, so please CC me if you have any idea what
> I did wrong ...
> (I try to avoid recompiling whole of gcc over new binutils going from
> 2.24-something to 2.25.1, may be my fault lies here ..? I hoped those
> two versions of binutils close enough for just replacing binutils)
--
~Randy
Powered by blists - more mailing lists